A judge made a key pre-trial ruling
Friday in the 1971 cold murder case of defendant Phillip Arthur
Thompson, but perhaps the most dramatic part of the proceeding
was moments later when a Bay Area woman in the audience, suggested
by the prosecution to be working for Thompson's defense, was
scolded by the judge and nearly arrested on a charge of contempt
of court.

The woman, Kate Dixon, is a journalist
for the Website newsmakingnews.com and has frequently appeared
in court in support of Thompson, who she says is being prosecuted
for a crime he did not commit.

Thompson, now in his 60s, was arrested
in 2003 after his DNA was allegedly found on the underwear of
murdered Sacramento beautician Betty Cloer, whose body was dumped
in a remote area of Cameron Park.

Dixon told the Mountain Democrat she
thinks there is evidence that suggests another man killed Cloer,
a man who is currently in state prison and due to testify for
the prosecution.

El Dorado County deputy district attorney
Trish Kelliher has made attempts to conceal that man's name in
open court to protect his identity in prison. But Dixon, a former
attorney, came to court to fight the concealment, having filed
a motion days earlier to unseal the identity of the man, who
has been referred to only as John Doe.

Intitially Judge James R. Wagoner
ruled that Dixon and other media organizations can print John
Doe's real name, since the name was legally obtained from the
case file prior to his sealing of related records.

But prosecutor Kelliher argued that
the court should bar the name from being printed until it researches
the role Dixon and her colleague Virginia McCullough are playing
in the case.

"We need to clarify who these
women are," Kelliher said. "On one hand they claim
to be journalists, but on the other they appear to be working
for the defense."

McCullough is a contributing writer
for Dixons's Website. McCullough said Friday she was working
as a runner for the Thompson team, but that Dixon does not or
did not have such a role. Thompson's attorney Dain Weiner agreed.

Wagoner agreed that more research
needs to be done as to both women's role. He issued a temporary
gag order on newsmakingnews, forbidding it from printing the
actual name of John Doe. Dixon was then ordered to appear for
the proceeding set for today.

The judge informed the Mountain Democrat
that the gag order only applies to newsmakingnews. But the Democrat,
citing the prosecution's argument of Doe's potential safety concerns,
chose to hold off on releasing the name until future proceedings.

Dixon addressed the court, which immediately
sparked a heated exchange.

"Your honor, does this mean I
cannot visit Mr. Thompson before the hearing Monday?" she
said.

Wagoner responded that for her to
do so would "certainly tighten the noose."

"You have no noose on me,"
she fired back. "I know his honor has wanted to jail me
for some time."

Wagoner immediately responded, "Ma'am,
you are bordering on contempt. One more word out of you and you
are going into custody."

Dixon then immediately lowered her
tone and sat quietly through the rest of the proceedings.

The key ruling made by Wagoner was
regarding a request made by Kelliher to exclude evidence obtained
by the defense that suggests victim Cloer was working as an informant
to law enforcement in the time leading up to her murder.

Weiner argued that there is credible
evidence from a number of independent sources suggesting such
a relationship with officials.

The defense attorney argued that the
jury should be able to hear such evidence, since it provides
insight into Cloer's state of mind the night she was killed.
He suggested that her being an informant could explain why she
got into the care of a man she had never met.

Weiner also said the information is
relevant because it could provide information as to a possible
motive by John Doe to kill Cloer.

Weiner argued: "John Doe has
an extensive criminal history with regard to narcotics, including
what we know to be a $250 a day heroin habit. If Cloer was working
as a drug informant, that gives motive for suspects in cases
with drugs to want to harm her."

Kelliher responded that John Doe is
a witness and will be able to respond to Weiner's accusations
while he testifies. Though she acknowledged the fact that Cloer's
family said she was an informant, she said that there is nothing
in the records suggesting such a circumstance.

Kelliher continued: "What we
have is either a story made up by family members who wanted to
paint her as this heavenly informant, or her telling her family
this story about being an informant so they wouldn't give her
a problem over her seeking distance from them."

Wagoner ruled to exclude Weiner's
informant-related evidence, but said his ruling could change
if new evidence was introduced in the days leading up to the
trial.